Need an ECR -NICEIC or NAPPIT?

Joined
5 Jan 2009
Messages
294
Reaction score
5
Country
United Kingdom
Hi all

I need an Electrical Integrity Report for a rental property as it’s becoming mandatory in Wales.

Does it matter who I use be it NICEIC or NAPPIT?

I think both are qualified to perform them but only NICEIC do EICRs?

NAPPIT name them something else I think??

Anyone confirm this a d want are the pros/cons of both. Im suspecting there are just good/bad qualified electricians in both schemes. I’m just confused as they seem to use different forms for a valid 5 year electrical test?

Cheers
 
Scroll down to Inspection and Testing of the Electrical Installation.

Anyone is allowed to carry out EICRs but not everyone who does is knowledgeable or experienced enough to do it.

The Rental Sector inspection system is not fit for purpose.
 
Last edited:
I was just confused as I presumed it has to be an EICR but it when I looked at sample forms/paperwork only NICEIC have them as a heading?

NAPIT forms are different and just labelled ECR.

You would think it would be standardised?
 
I was just confused as I presumed it has to be an EICR but it when I looked at sample forms/paperwork only NICEIC have them as a heading?
Well, the English equivalent states that the "Electrical Safety Standards" must be met.

As that term had no meaning it had to be defined as:

"(1) These Regulations may be cited as the Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020."

and

“electrical safety standards” means the standards for electrical installations in the eighteenth edition of the Wiring Regulations, published by the Institution of Engineering and Technology and the British Standards Institution as BS 7671: 2018(3);"

which are not statutory nor the only way things can be done.

so, everyone just assumes an EICR will do.



NAPIT forms are different and just labelled ECR.
You would think it would be standardised?
No, they like to compete.


Never assume those in charge know what they are doing.
 
Not seen the Welsh law yet, unlike the English law any reference material must be in English and Welsh so it can't refer to BS 7671 as only published in English.

But likely it will follow the same lines as the English law, and it will refer to other regulations for definitions. This is a problem, as the definition for the “consumer’s installation” which in the Electricity Safety Quality and continuity regulations 2002 means the electric lines situated upon the consumer’s side of the supply terminals together with any equipment permanently connected or intended to be permanently connected thereto on that side; does not match up with Electrical installation (abbr: installation). An assembly of associated electrical equipment having co-ordinated characteristics to fulfil Specific purposes. as used with BS 7671 which means an EICR following the IET format does not cover the items asked for in the English law. Hence.
The Rental Sector inspection system is not fit for purpose.
For any premises does not need to be domestic, inspection and testing is split up, we have the DNO who supply the electric who look after the supply meter, fuses etc, and fit seals. The we have the installation, which is in the main non current using equipment, odd bit out is the lights, then we have the inspection and testing of in service electrical equipment often referred to as PAT testing, for current using equipment, what can have items done by specialists for example central heating.

So every report with have what it includes, we can code for ease items LIM or FI which means limitation or further investigation really the same thing, but one is a fail with English system the other is not.

We can also code other items, years ago with had 1, 2, 3, and 4 with 4 being does not comply with current edition of wiring regulations for a new design. But the IET felt this was misleading so we add C to show new system so have C1 = Dangerous, C2 = Potentially Dangerous, and C3 = Improvement recommended. There is very little debate over C1, however 230 volt is potentially dangerous, so what falls into that category is up for debate, an inspector could decide not to use C2 and only code C1 and C3 and doing so breaks no laws or regulations. All he must do is list the faults, Pembrokeshire trading standards have successfully prosecuted an electrician for not listing faults, but to my knowledge there have been no prosecutions for using wrong code.

As with any new law it is for the courts to decide, and it is added to by case law. So we are lacking case law to clarify what is permitted.

So the big question is answered
“qualified person” means a person competent to undertake the inspection and testing required under regulation 3(1) and any further investigative or remedial work in accordance with the electrical safety standards;
this is rather open, it does not ask for some one who has passes a C&G 2391 exam, which is the exam for testing and inspecting, or to be a member of a scheme, and the schemes seem to authorise inspection and testing independent of the notification process. So I as a non scheme member could do the inspection and testing, I would not do it, as I don't have professional indemnity insurance which really one needs, don't want to sell my house if I get it wrong.

But the big question which is asked again and again is since BS 7671 is not retrospective, what should be listed as potentially dangerous, there is a difference between what should be morally done, and what is needed to be done, I would say all circuit RCD protection is morally required, but not so sure if needed for an EICR.

In the main we tend to pass the buck, and we read the electrical safety council best practice guide, Number 4 which has changed over the years, it was not that long ago this fuse-box-1.jpgwas included which said the old fuse box could still be used, now no longer shown.

But clearly in 1954 when my parents house was built, we felt that was OK, but the equipment we are using today has changed, an old version of the wiring regulations stated
(ix) Lighting fittings using filament lamps installed in a room having a non-conducting floor, mounted at such a height that they cannot readily be touched and are out of reach of earthed metal.
did not need earths, this was before 1966, but today we don't use filament lamps, so even with pre 1966 regulations we need earths running to every 230 volt lamp.

So could the old guy down the road who plays with radios (A radio ham) who has clearly passed an exam to allow him to do his hobby inspect the house and write a report which has legal standing, I really don't know, the same for the surveyor who writes out a home buyers report, mine had references to the state of the electrics. We all know that would not be in the sprite of the law, and would likely not satisfy a court, but what about my son, who works as an electrical engineer in a glass works, he has his C&G 2391, can he write out the report for his own house which he rents out?

So @EFLImpudence is right, not fit for purpose, and your left trying to decide do I want some one who will list every fault as a C2 so correction means the home is super safe, or some one who codes them all as C3 so you spend less money.

However even before any EICR laws landlords have been taken to court and fined when people have been killed in the home they rented out, so in many ways the EICR protects the landlord, he/she can show they did their best to ensure the home was safe. Or in other words they can pass the buck, and have a get out of jail free card.
 
..... so, everyone just assumes an EICR will do.
An assumption which appears to be confirmed by the government's guidance document for landlords - which not only explicitly mentions EICRs but even indicates what EICR 'codes' are acceptable (essentially just C3s) for private rented accommodation.

Kind Regards, John
 
Not seen the Welsh law yet, unlike the English law any reference material must be in English and Welsh so it can't refer to BS 7671 as only published in English.
You frequently make that assertion, but is there evidence that it's actually true?

It seems rather odd to me. For example, on what basis do LAs in Wales decide whether electrical work notified to them is 'acceptable'? In England that would primarily be a question of whether or not it was compliant with BS7671 but, if they are 'not allowed' to do that in Wales (because a Welsh version of BS7671 is not available) then what on earth is the basis for their decision?

Also, you used to often argue that it was acceptable in the UK to construct UK electrical installations in accordance with with the regulations of other European countries - but I very much doubt that they were available in Welsh, were they?

Kind Regards, John
 
Clearly there are problems using the Welsh language, we see many examples of poor translation, and it does not help when they moved to capatial from Mac to Cardiff where few speak Welsh.

It would be interesting to issue an EICR in Welsh, clearly no Junction boxes!
 
Not seen the Welsh law yet, unlike the English law any reference material must be in English and Welsh so it can't refer to BS 7671 as only published in English.
You frequently make that assertion, but is there evidence that it's actually true?
I'm afraid I don't have the definitive answer, but my understanding is that the basis of the Welsh language act 1993 (and the Welsh language measure 2011), is that English and Welsh languages have an equal standing, that means that government documents should be published bilingually (and available in accessible formats).

However, there are caveats.
The act is not retrospective.
Welsh documents are free to refer to documents that are English only.
If there was an important part of an English only document that would become the mainstay of a new document - that part would be translated and incorporated into the new document.

Additionally (from GOV.uk Welsh language guidance):

Screenshot_20230112-164312_Chrome.jpg
 
I'm afraid I don't have the definitive answer, but my understanding is that the basis of the Welsh language act 1993 (and the Welsh language measure 2011), is that English and Welsh languages have an equal standing, that means that government documents should be published bilingually (and available in accessible formats).
However, there are caveats.
The act is not retrospective.
Welsh documents are free to refer to documents that are English only.
If there was an important part of an English only document that would become the mainstay of a new document - that part would be translated and incorporated into the new document.
Thanks. Those caveats are much as I would expect, and seem to explicitly say that reference to 'English only' non-government documents is acceptable.

This seems to largely invalidate what eric appears to believe (and frequently asserts), for example in relation to BS7671.

Kind Regards, John
 
Thanks. Those caveats are much as I would expect, and seem to explicitly say that reference to 'English only' non-government documents is acceptable.
Yes, for example here are the Welsh Government web pages pointing to Approved document P,



Both links within the page will download the same English only document.

My own caveat, is that my knowledge refers to published documents; there will be factors relating to creating new laws, that I am unaware of.
 
Yes, for example here are the Welsh Government web pages pointing to Approved document P,
Indeed.
My own caveat, is that my knowledge refers to published documents; there will be factors relating to creating new laws, that I am unaware of.
Fair point. One might hope (but without holding one's breath :-) ) that they will have had the sense to realise that to forbid new laws from referring to non-Welsh documents would tie their hands behind their backs - i.e. potebtially very restrictive and 'toublesome'. For example, I imagine that it's unlikley that any British or international Standards have been published in Welsh.

However, what I don't know is how much 'sense' they actually have!

Kind Regards, John
 
Back
Top